Because of various problems with Blogger, I've copied everything as of November 26, 2012 over to WordPress. The new location is Ask the Scientologist. I am not deleting this blog and will still accept comments and answer questions here too, but any new articles will appear at the WordPress location. I apologize if this causes any problems.

Monday, March 7, 2011

What Annoys Me Most About Scientologists

I do not and will never hate Scientologists.  I was one.  I think that most Scientologists are good people who have been trapped by their own desire to do good work and help others.

I will not attack Scientologists for practicing Scientology.  That is their right.  What a person believes is their business and no one else's.  Scientology, the belief system, should not be banned.  Ideas cannot be erased and to try to do so only gives them more importance.

I just want to point out where Scientologists' behavior varies significantly from what they say they advocate, especially Scientologists who have left the Church of Scientology.

First up, responsibility.  Or, to be more precise, Scientologists' universal refusal to take responsibility for what they have done.

Scientologists simply don't take responsibility for their actions, or non-actions, in relation to Scientology.  Ex-churchies inevitably blame David Miscavige for everything.  It is his, and only his, fault that things are bad in the church.

Did they applaud when Miscavige changed everything?  Yes they did.  Did they hop right up and take the now-"corrupted" courses and buy the now-"corrupted" books?  Yes they did.  Did they pay lip-service to the "Keeping Scientology Working" policy while applauding every little thing that Miscavige did to subvert and violate that policy?  Yes they did.  Did they do anything to stop David Miscavige from taking over and destroying their church?  Why, no, they didn't.

I know that some Scientologists did refuse to go along with Miscavige's crimes, lies and abuse but they were kicked out.  And a vast majority of Scientologists whole-heartedly condemned the very people who were taking responsibility.

And now Scientologists blame Miscavige and only Miscavige for everything that they allowed to happen and even applauded.

No responsibility.  None.

But wait, there's more!  We have, in the Independent Scientology community, certain executives who worked directly with and for David Miscavige.  While they were "in favor" they supported, forwarded and emulated Miscavige's corruption, crimes, lies and abuse.  They were part of the machinery that corrupted the Scientology technology.  They were part of the gang that beat up and mentally abused staff.  They were part of the evil.

And, now, they are the biggest supporters of the "It's all Miscavige, it's only Miscavige, I'm not responsible at all!" propaganda.

In other words, those most responsible for supporting Miscavige, those most responsible for forwarding his corruption and his lies, those most responsible for the evil that they now condemn, are saying that, no, they "were not responsible at all!"  Perhaps that's no surprise, but it is very disappointing.  I'd much rather hear, in detail, how they are taking full responsibility for their crimes, their abuse and their lies.

Yes, I know that some of these top executives have "admitted" to some bad acts but they still blame Miscavige for "making them do it".  It's still no responsibility.  They were in positions of power in Scientology and they used their power to help Miscavige do his evil deeds and they used their power to destroy those who tried to stop Miscavige -- for years.  They have much to answer for but, no, it's "not their fault".

It really annoys me that Scientologists emphatically will not take responsibility for what they have done or should have done.  Truly, the dirtiest word in Scientology is "responsibility".

Next up is confront.  Scientologists cannot confront.

And this is also very annoying to me.  Scientologists will brag about their confront.  They have done the TRs Course and, boy, can they now confront!

But they can't and they won't.

If you try to discuss simple facts with a Scientologist, they plug their ears and go "La-la-la-la-la-la", they delete your comments, they compile lists of websites they can't look at, books they can't read, newspapers they must not see, people they must never talk to and they generally run away.

They do not confront.

If you mention the simple fact that Scientology has never produced a single OT, they cannot hear you.  They actually are aware that there are no OTs but they cannot confront that fact.  The same goes for the non-existent abilities of Clear and the promised-but-missing abilities from the Grades.

The same goes for all their world-saving "solutions".  Their "solutions" have all failed in the real world, but those facts cannot, will not, be confronted.

These are simple facts.  Every Scientologist knows these facts are true but they cannot confront them.  Whenever I've mentioned some of these facts to a Scientologist, there is a deafening silence.  No debate, no argument, just run-run away and never confront it.

And finally, justifications.  In Scientology dogma, justifications are Bad.  According to L. Ron Hubbard, when you have done something wrong, you will inevitably try to justify it in some way.  Scientologists are supposed to recognize that, when you hear justifications, look for the harmful actions or neglect that preceeded it.

But all I hear from Scientologists are justifications.  Scientologists are well-equipt with many "reasons why" things didn't work out as promised.  They can give you all the justificatons why those processes didn't work, why these "solutions" never solved things, why those exhalted Scientologists were found to have committed massive fraud and why they ended up with their church destroyed.

And none of their justifications match reality or lead to any resolution.  Here is where Scientologists' refusal to take responsibility and their lack of confront come together to create the justifications why it isn't their fault, it isn't Scientology's fault and it isn't Hubbard's fault.  It is always someone else's fault, someone else's error or someone else's "evil intentions".

Scientologists' solution to Scientology's failings and broken promises is to justify, prevaricate and make up "reasons why" -- but never to simply confront the facts, take responsibility and live with the truth.  It's hard work being a Scientologist.

I have no problem with Scientologists practicing Scientology and getting whatever gains they get from it.  But they pretend to a reality that doesn't exist  because they cannot confront the reality that is.  Yes, they can feel better.  No, they cannot "go OT".

Scientologists' universal lack of responsibility and inability to confront annoys me a lot.  You see, these are things that Scientologists are proud of: their superior responsibility and their powerful confront -- and yet they have none.  They don't even try.

This is Scientology.  Scientology isn't what they say, it's what Scientologists do.  And the above is what Scientologists do.

If I were still a Scientologist, I'd be so ashamed.


  1. Love this post. Very spot on. And I agree. It is so frustrating.
    I also get very frustrated about the use of the Tone Scale. A Scientologist I know called someone else a 1.1.
    Oh really, I thought. So you think she should quietly disposed of like LRH recommended in SOS. If she is so horrible, why did you hire her and why do you still have her on your pay roll.
    No, it is simply that she disagrees with you. You can not confront the fact that she disagrees with you and further more that she might be right.
    No confront. Just BS. Yea gads!

  2. Now that is really cruel! You listened to what Scientologists claimed they got from Scientology, and you expected them to actually demonstrate those abilities.

    You actually expect Scientologists to live up to their own hype? You actually expect Scientologists to be what they claim a Scientologist is?

    I'm sure your blog is high on their this-must-not-be-confronted list.

  3. @Squash Lady

    Oh, yes! The famous "You're 1.1!" justification. They can't confront what someone says, so they slap a label on them: "You're 1.1!" "He's NCG (no case gain)" "They're 'suppressive'!"

    Don't confront, just slap a label on them so you never have to actually confront something.

    Good comment.

  4. Actually, Scientologists are forbidden to confront the truth. The truth is "entheta" to Scientologists and Hubbard forbade Scientologists from ever confronting "entheta".

    It's part of Scientology's "perfect" technology. They have to do it.

  5. The convoluted world of being a Scientologist is puzzling indeed. It is justified by blindly following voluminous LRH writings. People conduct themselves with arrogance, aggression, and proud disregard for logic, intelligence, compassion. I think the longer and deeper you’re in Scientology the farther away you get from being an upstanding member of society. Your native intelligence decreases and is replaced by what you’ve read you should think. Your observations of people and life are replaced by substitutes ("tokens") of your own opinions with convenient labels such as tone levels, PTS talk, ethics-speak, case “phenomena” and on and on. Your IQ drops. This is insidious and happens so incrementally, it is masterful. Through all this, you work harder to justify more. You confront less in order to avoid reconciling the gap between what you observe and know and what the almighty church and staff say.

    Example, LRH wrote false stories about his life, he referred to people as stupid, he was ferociously critical. What does this hypocrisy say about his “scriptures” - the foundation Scientology is built upon? Answering that question requires confront. While the answer seems obvious now, when still in the church I wasn’t responsible or brave enough to face my observations and follow through to a rational conclusion. I was fairly intelligent at the start but lost more of my self the longer I was in.

    I agreed with just enough of the tech to believe I was bound to the moral code of the church. But wait, those morals are anti-self, anti-people, anti-society! So you squash your thinking more and more to keep yourself in line and be a good follower. With each twist to conform, you invalidate your self, become less rational, more isolated.

    It seems like a lot of people leave but continue operating with the faulty coping mechanisms they acquired to survive in the church. They keep not confronting, not taking responsibility, keep justifying. The alternative is bleak, definitely uncomfortable, often painful - facing your errors and bad integrity, your harm to others. It is not easy.

    I hope there is full recovery from this damaged state of affairs. It is like I’ve wrestled out of a death grip and now need to rebuild myself and my life. I hope for a full return of the intelligence and ability I started with, that I’ll become more able to articulate, to converse, that I’ll experience a resurgence of my social skills. It might be easier if you don't confront your stupidity and damages, but if you don't you'll keep repeating the mistakes.

    The good news is it is a wonderful world out here! There are some truly compassionate, smart people available for friendship and support. There are great community colleges where we can take classes that really do improve job skills. Some churches have outreach programs to help people withOUT trying to recruit them. Amazing. Life keeps getting better the farther you get from the gloomy, depressing world according to Scientology.

    It is hard to understand people getting out of the church's death grip and still believing in Scientology. It seems like a convenience to think it is all David Miscavige, instead of facing that the criminal acts are rooted in and justified by the doctrines of the church. I’m surprised people don’t seize the opportunity to look objectively at the true situation. Maybe not so surprising, given how hard it is to face being so wrong.

    And it seems so strange, the demeanor of the top execs that did serious harm to so many. I justify (there it is again) by saying they’re trying to right their wrongs by broadcasting disclosures of hard evidence that might finally help the FBI and IRS step in and stop the crimes, human rights violations, and harm done to the vulnerable youth. But something still seems missing.

    Your articles and email replies are always helpful. I laughed when I read the recent comment that said only "I love you". I do too, keep on writing!

    Anne to you, Anonymous to everyone else

  6. Thank you for this, Bill. I'm glad someone other than a generality-spouting hater from some natterboard has not only cognited, but communicated this - it is vital information.

    In the Indie community, I can recall one incident that stuck out in my mind, that really made me re-think how I feel about the "new movement". It was a comment dismissing (inval/eval at its best) a specific poster, using the thought-stopping phrase "NCG". Mind you, the person who made the NCG comment had not reviewed the subjects PC folders, had not audited them, nor even spoken to them.

    As someone who tries really hard to be open to the possibility of people enjoying the "Tech" wherever they please, this struck me notably. If this is "technical perfection", would I want this in my life? We can't blame this one on DM, this is straight up LRH Tech - if you're critical in any way, you're NCG or SP or PTS or a DB or etc. etc. etc.. Don't handle or understand, attack.

    As for the ex-execs, those I have in mind anyway, if they have the level of detail they claim to possess, they could put an end to this immediately. I understand they would want to play their cards close to the chest, but if ending abuse is actually a goal here, it could be done quickly.

    That said, I understand not wanting to "degrade" the Tech by such an admission, and not wanting to implicate oneself as a side-effect. It goes to their personal and spiritual investment in the subject. The only problem there, is that if the Tech worked *in its entirety*, this would never have been an issue - period.

  7. @Anne/Anonymous

    Thank you, well written and so true.

    As a Scientologist, even an ex-churchie, it is tough to start to think again -- and it is difficult to understand how dark it is in Scientology and how bright and wonderful it is when you rejoin the real world.

    All you readers and commenters surely make my days!

  8. @omnom

    Once again, thank you for your insightful comments.

    Yes, the ex-execs certainly want to "play their cards close to their chests," but who does that benefit?

    They are not helping Scientology nor those still trapped inside the church, and they are obviously not helping those still trapped in the Scientology mindset. They know that if they revealed all they knew, they would invalidate much of Scientology's basic tenents. The truth would destroy much of Scientology and so they hide it!

    Now, who does that benefit?

  9. This is a very good read. I left Staff and the "church" 5 mos ago and have since been given an SP declare. Be that as it may, I have received more than a few e-mails from people still on Staff and still public essentially accusing me of lacking confront and being a victim.

    It's sad to say that they are the ones who are lacking confront. I actually took a look at things the way the are together with recent history and made a "causative" move. That is certainly not being a victim and I certainly don't blame others as a victim would. I guess it makes them feel better to tell me that I am being a victim.

    Basically, after 18 years, I just changed my mind about Scn and those who are still in just cannot quite have that.

    Oh, well. I wish them well, even though they won't have me around to do eternal lower condition formulas for them.

  10. Re: "lacking confront and being a victim"

    Thanks for you comment. That accusation from victims who lack the ability confront their situation is rather ironic.

    Yes, you were the one demonstrating confront. You had the guts to look at what is and deal with that.

    The fact that some Scientologists are willing to "tough out" their victimhood is not laudable. It is only sad.

  11. Scientologists see the abuses and they just turn their heads away. How can so many people, who "pride themselves" on how "superior" they are, do this?

    They see good people, people they know are honest, good hearted people, being declared "suppressive" and banished. And they turn their heads away.

    They experience the intense pressure and greed of the church, with very late-night calls and "reges" camping on their doorstep and they say nothing. They meekly pay up.

    They see their friends and family declaring bankruptcy, losing their homes and businesses and they turn away. They do nothing, they say nothing.

    There is no confront. There is no responsibility. There is no goodness there.

    Yes, they should all be ashamed for what they don't do.

  12. I agree with your post, Just Bill. I also don't enforce what people believe, although I consider those who believe junk and don't examine that junk to be junkies--addicts of something that harms them and others.

    I have never advocated policing people's beliefs, but I DO advocate confronting people about their beliefs and whether or not they should be bruted about in Congress for example, or enforced on our political candidates for another example or made a justification for cruelty.

    The two marks you were referring to are angry marks and sad marks about what was done to THEM, but not a tear out of them for children who were harmed in their stupid cult. Many cults are the same, but this is our cult, the one we gave time and money to, people.

    Have they ever read anything on Ex-Scio Kids? Makes me angry and makes me determined to do something.

    I'll be at Hemet on March 12th. Will you?

  13. My name is Richard and I have a serious question to everyone that was a Scientologist. Unfortunately, I took courses there and became a member. My family and I were invited to the New Years eve event at the Fort Harrison Hotel in Clearwater, Florida. We drove from Orlando which was over 100 miles to get there. The minute we got there at the Fort Harrison Hotel the guards stopped as at the door and checked our names to see if it was on the list and it was. For some unknown reason that wasn't enough for the guard. He began interrogating us and he wouldn't stop. He then asked for our membership cards and we showed it to him then he asked for for our drivers license and we showed it to him. Then he asked as about all the courses we have taken and we told him and he still wouldn't let us pass. Finally, we just gave up and left. We wasted all that gas money and time for nothing. The Scientologist never gave us an explanation on why the heck did they invite us there and put our names on the list and then force us to leave. Afterwards, they still call us and invite us to events. We have told them repeatedly about how they humiliated us on New Years eve and they act like they know nothing about it and still continue to call us. Can anyone here think of an explanation on why the Scientologists did that to us? After that happened we tore up our membership cards.


    Um, no.

    You, apparently, know absolutely nothing about Scientology and Scientologists, but you do seem to have been reading some of the more alarming reports out there. I think you should take a break from the Internet and try to calm down.

  15. @Richard

    Re: Fort Harrison

    Congratulations, you are not in Scientology any more.

    Scientologists, especially in Clearwater, are very, very afraid. Their world is falling apart and they don't know what to do.

    The reason you went through all that was because you were strangers. The guards had never seen you on any services there. At Flag, strangers are dangerous -- they might destroy everything!

    I find your story very enlightening. This shows that Scientology in Clearwater is in much more trouble than I'd realized. Their reaction to one tiny group of strangers reveals much about how far down they have fallen.

  16. Bill, I am not sure if this is the right place to ask question but I would like to know one thing:

    How much impact anon protests and internet campaign had on people inside Scientology? It certainly had significant impact on people outside it - Many more know about Xenu now and are therefore less likely to fall into trap; Newspapers are now more willing to print incriminating stuff about the cult.

    However I've been reading some stuff by Scientology deflectors, most notably, Geir Isene and they claim that protests did nothing to make them change their minds, which is a little discouraging.

    What to you think?

  17. @python

    Any place is a good place to ask a question.

    I keep a link to the latest Ask a Question thread at the top of the left-hand panel for convenience. We have some great discussions over there.

    But, to your question.

    The Anonymous protests have had a massive effect on the Church of Scientology and a significant effect on almost all Scientologists. Personally, I've read many statements from ex-Scientologists who credited the Anonymous protests for making them aware that there was a problem and look for the reason -- which led them straight out of Scientology.

    Of course, the church has included Anonymous into their canon, putting them right up there with the Evil psychs and Evil pharma as the Satan of their religion, so it can be expected that some true believers will discount Anonymous' message.

    As for Geir Isene, he is a Scientologist. He would, of course, hate Anonymous for exposing the lies and fraud of Scientology. He would, of course, hate Anonymous for attacking and making fun of his religion. Naturally, he would discount the importance and impact of Anonymous.

  18. Just Bill,

    Before attributing motives to Geir that might not be his, I would add some missing data to this thread regarding his evaluation of Anonymous' importance.

    Geir posted on his own blog a while back the main reasons he personally left the church. I don't remember the exact number of reasons he prioritized there (maybe half a dozen?, but I do remember those which held first and last place: The incident that occurred when he met David Miscavige had more to do with Geir's decision than any other factor, something I can understand. He ranked Anonymous' protests as last in significance as to how it influenced him personally,at the time.

    If you've read any of Geir's writing you have to acknowledge that he's a pretty analytical type. I wouldn't expect him to be swayed by the opinions of others, especially those he doesn't know (and can't know - they're anonymous),and I would expect that his own personal evaluations would wholly inform his decisions.

    In reading this thread, I think we're just plain guilty of some gross generalizations here, and if you're fine with that, hey, it's your blog, and to be fair I've seen some pretty magnanimous and open-minded stuff here, as well.

    Personally, I'm no longer a scientologist, and I can see at least one of the out points you mention in this post in most scientologists at any given time. But look around you- at a time when there are finally so many different kinds and even degrees of scientologists, maybe it's time to re-evaluate this practice of painting all of them with the same brush. Just my 2cents worth. Thanks for the chance to add it.

  19. @lunamoth

    Re: Geir Isene

    You are correct. I stand corrected. Personally, I like Geir and respect his honesty and intelligence.

    I apologize to Geir and my readers for making a broad statement that was unwarranted.


  20. There are all kinds of Scientologists...I was in and around it for 30 years, so, yeah, I knew a lot of different "types."

    On the other hand, the one thing they all had in common was a NEED, a big sucking NEED to have one answer, one certainty, one group to make sense of life. I realize now that what often seemed like vitality was suppressed panic. I look back on my auditors, who were the ones I knew most intimately besides my family, and I see that that look in their eyes was something I ignored. The ones who were calmer were the most sociopathic, enjoying the manipulation and cruelty they could mete out.

    This, in my opinion, is a weakness. It is not necessary to have to have an answer, a certainty or a group if a person will attend to basic reality and the pain of it without giving into the temptation to run away. I run away for moments or hours, but I no longer run away for days and weeks and decades.

    The problem with major running away is that you run over other people. When ex-Scientologists start taking responsibility for what they DID in their panic, that will be good.

  21. Just Bill - You are a class act.



  22. The people in Scientology are playing Orwellian mind-games on themselves to tolerate the situation while the ex-Scientologists are trying to distance themselves from their pasts. It's been said that it takes 10-15 years for ex-members to "reprogram" themselves emotionally and intellectually. That written, they still might never admit any wrongdoing committed while they were members; having a conscience is an individual trait some people never develop. Finally I would say that this dodging of responsability is not just the bane of Scientology; I've heard of ex-Mormons, ex-Fundamentalist Christians, and former Nazis (1921-1945) who also avoided taking responsability for their actions as members. Independent Scientology is probably keeping some people from facing the music. Until corporate Scientology is found to be a criminal organization by the US government no ex-member will pay restitution or be forced to apologize.

  23. @Strelnikov

    Interesting. I wonder if the sign that a Scientologist was truly recovered from Scientology would be when they finally confront and take responsibility for their actions/failures-to-act?

  24. @Vera

    Re: Hemet 3/12

    Sadly, it's too far away from where I live right now. I will be there in spirit and I hope those close enough will drop by. There are some important free speech aspects being challenged in Hemet.

  25. @ Just Bill
    Bingo. And you will probably never hear it from David Miscavage once the "church" is defunct, though the famous people might instruct their ghostwriters to put apologies into their post-Scientology autobiographies. The important leaders within the organization will dodge true responsibility until their criminal actions are completely exposed by the US or foreign governments, and even then they will talk about how DM slapped them around; these stories will become the "I was following orders" of the Scientology aftermath. All that written, true contrition cannot be mandated by law; you can get cash settlements and public censure, but you can't make them apologize and mean it.

  26. The responsibility blame game here reminds me of Hitler and WWII. The similarities are astounding. It is very hard to own up to the attrocites one has done in the name of something else and it is much easier to project, lay blame or abdicate responsibility altogether. Yes, in many ways Miscavige is much like Hitler, that is a point which is hard to argue. Many people did attrocious things under Hitler, and so have a lot of people under Hubbard's and Miscavige's rule.

  27. Dear Bill,
    What annoys me most about Scientology is a narrow, very narrow understanding of what communication is. There is the comm formula and that's great. There are TRs and they are great. But it is what is missing that bugs me.
    I have come to this realization after taking some courses outside of Scientology. I am learning about how to be assertive. It was actually my ruin and yet in 30 years of SCN, I never learned it. I have learned it on line in two weeks for $110.00.
    I have also learned about emotionally honest communication. Scn does not teach emotionally honest communication. SCN teaches the opposite. SCN teaches about PR, acceptable truths, shore stories and etc. If a Scientologist is upset with another Scientologist one is encouraged to think a) it's his case and he should handle it in session or b) the other person is out-ethics and you should write a KR.
    God forbid, you would just confront the person and say something emotionally honest like, "When you do (whatever), it makes me feel (however). No, emotionally honest communication is not taught nor is it encouraged.
    This really bugs me about Scientology.

  28. @Squash Lady

    Well said. That was one of the things I realized as well. They do not teach communication and, in fact, don't know how to communicate. They only teach control -- how to control themselves and others via communication. In the real world, they aren't known for their communication skills. Yes, that bugs me.

  29. Thank you, Just Bill. I love the real communication courses I am now taking from dumb ol', unenlightened, stupid WOGS.

  30. I have been looking for an audience to share some thoughts I have. I have been studying human health, physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual for a long time. Among areas of study, I have looked at LRH and his work, his lectures. And there is a thought that is beginning to form in regards to LRH and some of this philosophies and practices. One is, I think he had an intolerance in consuming dairy, like many people have (ref: Dr. Walter Veith video lecture "Udderly Amazing"). And he believed in the consumption of dairy. He had spoken of it as part of the practice of doing purification and clearing through auditing/processing. I.E. "drink chocolate milk". This may have helped contribute to having an ulcer, and to a leaky gut. And the leaky gut, through the passage way of the ulcer and other leaking part of intestive may have allow milk protein and/or other incompletely broken down food to pass into the circulatory system and lymph. This then created other problems, like skin problems, vision problems, medical problems, arthritis, and damage to the blood/brain barrier and leaking into the circulatory system of the brain, causing mental/emotional/spiritual maladies, like depression, anxiety, paranoia, or other psychiatric problems. The Purifs (such as sauna, water, and exercise, and even perhaps the niacin) help detox the ciruclatory system of these protiens or other toxins that have leaked into the circulatory and lymph system. And as he spoke, in 30-90 days people may experience the clearing or purification of the body from the purif. He may have also had a gluten sensitivity, which has some of the similar effects of milk protein in the digestive system along with the auto immune response. (I.E. his Barley Milk substitute). The multi vitamins, especially the B vitamins and calcium magnesium may help counter some of the damaging effects on the body from these two elements entering the circulatory lymph system.

    I welcome comments and feedback. I have more to add, but I at least wanted to give some preliminary info before doing a more thorough write up. And get the opportunity to get some feedback on the dietary practices experienced during a purif, and during processing/auditing by other scientologists. And to get some feedback from people who know more details of LRH's dietary practices to help either support my hypothesis or counter it.


Comments will be moderated. Have patience, I get around to it pretty quick. As a rule of thumb, I won't approve spam, off-topic, trolling or abusive stuff. The rest is usually OK. Yes, you can disagree with me.